Destroy The VIllage In Order To Save It

Look what Perry did to our nice wall!

Romney is attacking Perry for being insufficiently hateful towards brown people.  Here.

As Chait notes, Obama is beginning to crush the GOP contenders among Latino voters.  Now I have no idea what this means for 2012.  Obama is in a lot of trouble in a lot of ways.

But the GOP seems devoted, driven even, to alienate the largest growing segment of the population.

I'm not sure how much longer you can sustain yourself as a party if you constantly keep dividing the populace one against the other.  Having an economic disaster is bad for Obama.  Being a Republican is bad for everything else.

Obligatory Friday Post

Nana-nana-nana-nana FATMAN!

I've spent most if my internet time today chortling over the firing of Larry Parrish as hitting coach.

Nevertheless here is Kos on polling this early in a race:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/29/1021334/-Occasional-reminderdont-read-too-much-into-primary-polls,-yet?via=blog_1

If you don't want to click through, just note that Wes Clark did not get the nomination in 2004 and we were denied the spectacle of a Clinton-Guiliani tilt in 2008.

This sort of feeds into the Christie speculation.  He will never be as popular as the day he announces that he runs (should he do so).  He will then begin the inevitable diminishing.

Well, OK, Christie could use a little diminishing, if you know what I mean...

Well, This Is Interesting...

I was probably one of the many who dismissed the Occupy Wall Street protests.  I don't disagree with their message and I don't have a problem with Trustafarians.  I just think that left wing protests tend to be fed into this overwhelming media machine that inevitably spits out Chicago '68.  Millions marched against the Iraq War before it started and they were a footnote between Bill Kristol appearances.

Anyway, unions may be joining the protests.

One of the success of the GOP was turning working class union members against the hippies.  It would be cool if the Teamsters and the hippies got together.

Kumbaya, baby!

The Onion For The Win

The Onion is running a brilliant story (fake of course) about how a group of Congressmen have taken school children hostage and are threatening to kill them if their demands aren't met.

Here is the pic running with the story:

TPM notes that this has raised the ire of the Congress, the Capitol Police and, I'm sure, the Department of Homeland Security.

The whole "We are not amused" tone of the condemnations means that - hopefully - this story will get traction.  At some point you have to realize that picking fights with satirists is a bad idea.

Money quote comes at the end:

With the ransom deadline nearing and no apparent resolution in sight, President Barack Obama was summoned in a last-ditch effort to diffuse the situation. Despite an emotional bullhorn appeal to return to "honest talks aimed at reducing the national debt and getting millions of unemployed Americans back to work," the chief executive was met with silence.

"There's just no way of getting through to these people," said Obama, holding his head in his hands. "I know Speaker Boehner personally, and I know that he and his colleagues will not hesitate for a second to kill these poor children if they don't get their way."

"Trust me, this Congress will do it," the president added

Bleh...

I'm exhausted and enervated by the collapse of the Braves (and the Red Sox, too, I guess).  Just want to crawl into a hole and go to sleep.

But I did want to point out this piece over at Balloon Juice.

I'm going to go ahead and just copy it in total:

James Fallows has a good round-up of news on the pepper spraying cop. He was caught on video doing the same thing to yet another protester, in clear violation of the NYC’s rules on the use of pepper spray, and the story is getting big play worldwide.

What’s interesting to me is how a protest designed to draw attention to the disparity in wealth between Wall Street millionaires and the rest of us, as well as the injustice of the bank bailout, has morphed into a conversation about police overreach. We’re like a big dysfunctional family that never deals with any of our problems, and when today’s problem gets us a little agitated, we latch on to one minor detail that’s related to some other festering sore in our collective psyche and use that to distract ourselves.

Now that we have our distraction, it’s time to burn someone at the stake. Instead of having a discussion about our tolerance and even celebration of brutal cops, para-military no-knock raids, and expensive, pointless security theater, we’re going to drill in on this one asshole who maced a few protesters and get him fired. Once that happens, we’ll go back to forgetting about the elephant in the room.

Dominoes

Banksters at work.

No, not the pizza.

Here is a good explanation of what's happening in Europe, if you just want broad, understandable explanations.

It is impossible to see the trend.  Greece was a legitimate mess and shouldn't have been let into the Euro.

But Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Italy were more or less OK, but got hit very hard by the housing bubble.

Then the markets responded by punishing their bonds because... they could.  I go back to this jackass and can't help but think that much of what ails Europe is this climate of unregulated international finance.  These monetary mercenaries have declared war on countries' bonds because they can exploit unease over the economic conditions to create a vicious cycle.

By the time the whole thing collapses, they will have made their fortunes and moved on.

Required Reading

Charles Pierce has a blog now.

This is awesome.

A good sample.

UPDATE: Even better.

Class Warfare Can Begin By Bombing London

This little clip has been going around the Internet.  It's a London trader explaining how he loves recessions because they are money making opportunities.

When I say that people in finance are sociopaths, I want you to know I'm not being hyperbolic.  I really think they have created a culture whereby any sense of human decency, of human connection, has been lost.

No, not lost.  Shot, dismembered, disemboweled, burned and the ashes scattered.

This is why we need a new populism that harnesses outrage at this view of the world - making money off the misery of millions - and put it to work making a fairer, juster world.  This is why Elizabeth Warren has become the darling of anyone to the left of Larry Summers.  She gets it and even better she can explain why.

But unfortunately, we have a cultural problem.  Regulatory reform can end some bad practices, but ultimately, they will find ways around the reforms.  They always do.

One reason I want to see higher taxes on the rich - especially those who earn their money through "finance" - is that they will do less damage with that money than will the government.

In 1980, Reagan said, "Government is not the solution to your problems, government IS the problem."

Replace "Government" with "Markets", and I think you have a rallying cry for 2012.  Obama is temperamentally unable to be that messenger, but that message has to be made.

Not Buying It

I finally got a chance to read Frank Rich's new piece.  I wish I could say that having several weeks between columns has made Frank even better, but he's only gotten longer not better.

Anyway, he makes a claim comparing Perry to Goldwater and noting that after Goldwater's rout in '64, savvy Beltway types called the GOP dead for a generation, yet they stormed back and took the White House in '68 and gave us the Reagan Revolution and all the crap that came with it.

Basically, he said Perry could beat Obama.

Yeah, I guess that could happen.  Perry looks like he's been hit with a tranquilizer dart every time he opens his mouth and holds view that most Americans find scary as hell.  But, sure Frank, whatever you say.

The problem is that the pro-GOP wave that carried Nixon into the White House was based on one big thing: race.

After winning against Goldwater in '64, LBJ advanced both the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act through Congress, altering the political landscape of the South and the country.  What he did - and he knew he was doing it - was throw the South into the hands of the GOP.  First Wallace and then Nixon and then Reagan adopted the language of racial code in ways that cemented an alliance between white Southern conservatives and the GOP.

The Solid South was broken from the Democratic party, never to return.

Additionally, the cancer of Vietnam created an internecine war within the Democratic party.

In short, the Democratic party shattered under the duel stresses of racial politics and Vietnam.  I don't really see the same dynamic at play in 2012.

Rich goes on to say that you have these boutique third party movements by media elites like Freidman and Bloomberg.  Whatever.  Third parties coalesce around grass roots movements, not top down pandering.  Yes, it helps to have a charismatic figure to coalesce around, but who would THAT be?  Buyh?  Lieberman? Bloomberg?

Spare me.

No, I think we might see a third party in 2012, but it will be if Romney wins the nomination.  Some true believer, a combo of Teatard and Christianist, will jump in and ride that crazy 20% to a decent showing in the general.  Decent enough to deny Romney a win.

I'm going with Bachmann.

Honestly...

Just click through and read the headline.

There have been a ton of pixels killed this week about why the GOP field is so lackluster.  Let's remember that this crazy person was once polling second and won the Iowa Straw Poll.

Yes, That About Covers It

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2011/9/26/95321/5831

This is the last three years explained clearly and cogently.

Here is John Cole noting how the FEMA fight will work to the GOP advantage because of the "pox on both their houses" mindset.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/09/26/fiddling-while-pa-drowns/

UPDATE:  There's more stuff to read!

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/09/26/american-psycho/

You know how I've been saying Wall Street is full of psychopaths.  Turns out that's not fair to psychopaths.  That's not a punchline.  That's science!

Next!

Josh Marshall has a good question that I had been mulling all morning.

With Perry flaming out, who becomes the next anti-Romney?  All the cool kids in the GOP want it to be Christie, but he seems wisely to decide on sitting it out.  But unless Perry rights his ship quickly the GOP will have to find someone narcissistic enough to run for President, but conservative enough to appeal to the solid majority of GOP voters who hate Romney.

I would think it would have to be a Southern governor like McDonnell of Virginia, but who really knows?

Evil, Shameless, Immoral People

The House GOP is trying to ram MORE spending cuts through in order to pay for FEMA funds.

Remember that most GOP members would like to see FEMA - FEMA!? - disbanded or downsized.

Let Poland Spring supply water to those without.  Let Duracell power homes that have lost power.  Let Blackwater enforce the laws when tornado sweeps through.

This isn't governance, it's sociopathy.

I hope the government shuts down.  Right now, the Democrat's best hope is that people turn on these vicious a-holes in the House.

Sports

It's taken over 40 years, but I think I have reached a point of sanity about sports.

Today, my beloved Braves got shut out by... actually, I have no idea who the opposing pitcher was.  Never heard of him.  They have a one game lead with three to play against the best team in the NL, whereas the Cards play the worst team in the NL.  I doubt they make the playoffs.

My beloved Falcons played like a beer league flag football team AFTER the beer has started flowing.  I think they go 9-7 if Matt Ryan doesn't get killed first.  They were a trendy pick to win the Super Bowl.

And I'm more or less OK with it.  I haven't thrown anything, although it helps that I can't actually SEE the games.

There's a line in one of my favorite movies, Groundhog Day, where Phil says, "Maybe God's not omniscient. Maybe he's just been around so long, nothing surprises him anymore."

I've reached that point, maybe, and that's nice.  I don't need my kids to see me having a heart attack because Roddy White dropped the go ahead touchdown or Martin Prado couldn't get a runner in from third with one outs.

I Dunno, You Tell Me...

Didja hear?  Douthat has aped my style to perfection!

Maybe you can make sense of Ross Douthat's latest braindroppings in the Times.

My first read was that he was saying, "American must allow the occasional execution of potentially innocent people like Troy Davis, because if it weren't for the death penalty, no one would care that Troy Davis might have been innocent when we put him to death."

In typical Brooksian fashion, there are all sorts of nice points in there about the fallibility of our justice system and the harshness of prison life (although he seems a little too interested in prison rape).  But also in typical Brooksian fashion, the better points add up to nothing and somehow observations that would seem to be leading to a "liberal" solution veer suddenly off course and land squarely in the arena of GOP nostrums.

I just want the Times to know that if they pay, I can do that, too.

Herman's Hermits

Damn, I was ready to have t-shirts made.

Herman Cain?

Really?

Herman Cain?

I guess so.

I guess Perry got in too early rather than too late.

What a fascinating dynamic: Anyone crazy enough to win the GOP nomination is too crazy to win the GOP nomination.

Cain is no more than Bachmann without the crazy eyes, but clearly the GOP will now cast its desperate eyes for yet another savior.  Someone who - miraculously - is as batshit insane as they are, but can appear to be reasonable and reassuring.

Good luck with that.

UPDATE: I'll let Booman do the honors:

However, it appears that Rick Perry's biggest sin was to defend in-state tuition for the children of undocumented workers.

"If you say that we should not educate children who come into our state for no other reason than that they've been brought there through no fault of their own, I don't think you have a heart," Perry said. "We need to be educating these children because they will become a drag on our society. I think that's what Texans wanted to do. Out of 181 members of the Texas legislature when this issue came up [there were] only four dissenting votes. This was a state issue. Texas voted on it. And I still support it today."

The next day, Romney came out swinging:

"My friend Governor Perry said that if you don't agree with his position on giving that in-state tuition to illegals, then you don't have a heart," Romney said. "I think if you're opposed to illegal immigration, it doesn't mean that you don't have a heart; it means that you have a heart and a brain."

But Romney could have kept his mouth shut because practically every conservative commentator in the country pannedPerry's response and his overall performance.

That Perry's biggest problem was his position on in-state tuition for immigrants was clear in Frank Luntz's post-debate focus group, but he got no love for the rest of his performance either.

Famed lunatic John Podhoretz of the New York Post noted, "Just awful. After the first half hour, he seemed unable to speak a coherent sentence, even when he was carefully prepared — and he made a cringe-inducing bungle of a rehearsed soundbite about Romney’s flip-flopping. It was one of the worst moments I can remember.” Michelle Malkin said, "“any random high schooler at the CPAC conference in Washington could have done better than this.” Erick Erickson panned the whole field. “Good Lord,” Erickson wrote, “this was the worst debate I think I’ve ever watched.” Bill Kristol penned a column entitled 'Yikes' that begged New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to come to the rescue.

Now, if I were a conservative I wouldn't be happy with the field of candidates either. I would be unimpressed with Rick Perry's oratorical and debating skills, too. I'd be less excited about Mitt Romney than I am discussing wallpaper glue. I totally get this element of the criticism. But Rick Perry continues to get hammered for the very few decent things he has ever done in his life. In the last debate, he was lambasted for providing a HPV vaccine to the girls of Texas so that they won't die of cervical cancer later on in life. Yeah, I know that his decision was probably more about lining his pockets with Merck-money than any true compassion, but he did do the right thing. The crazy Texas legislature freaked out and overruled him, so cervical cancer is safe for now, at least in the Lone Star State.

And, now, in this debate he's getting killed for showing some basic human decency and not punishing children for the sins of their parents. According to Perry, there were only four dissenting votes when he passed the in-state tuition bill. If that's true, what does it say about the national Republican Party that they hate Latinos immeasurably more than the Texas GOP?

We're talking about a guy who executed an innocent man and then abused the power of his office to cover it up. Andhe's too liberal and decent to be the Republican nominee for president?

Folks, this is beyond ridiculous. It's downright scary.

Oops, They Did It Again

Romney and Perry square off. (click to see the glory of the GOP debate)

Can anyone explain to me why - four months before any balloting - we have to have a debate a week?  Isn't there a white girl missing somewhere in America to better occupy the cable news nets?

Anyway, they did it again.

Once again, there were too damned many people on the stage.  If someone can come up with a Death Panel for Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman, I will nominate them for a Peabody Award.  Oh, and Gary Johnson.

There are only four candidates that should be up on that stage.

Mitt Romney - Candidate of the corporate and more or less sane wing of the GOP.  He's a phony, he's craven, he's a little creepy.  But he's turned into a polished candidate.  He's the only Republican who can plausibly beat Obama.

Rick Perry - Still the frontrunner.  He's said some dopey things and he's been a lackluster debater.  But his positions are the positions of the GOP electorate.

Michelle Bachmann - The Christianist.  Despite fading faster than a watercolor in the rain, Bachmann does two things.  First, her presence makes Santorum unnecessary.  She can represent the bigoted Christian demographic all by her self.  Second, she makes Perry look reasonable.

Ron Paul - Libertarian Jesus.  Paul is a sideshow to a sideshow, but he's got an intensely loyal core group of insane people followers.

Once again, the punditry all agree that Romney wiped the floor with Perry.  There is the usual nostrums about how no longer being the frontrunner has "freed up" the candidate to really go on the offensive.

But all of this ignores the two central facts of the GOP primary.  All rational evidence points to Romney.  But the GOP has give up on reason.  Romney's support is likely capped at between 25-35% of Republican voters.  Maybe under the old rules, that would be enough to win - like McCain did in 2008.  But outside of New England, I don't see strong support for Romney among the actual people who vote in GOP primaries.

Which leads me to the second central fact.  As the fringe candidates drop out, who are they going to throw their support behind?  Or rather, where are their followers going to go?  Perry has already sucked the life out of Bachmann's campaign.  When she goes, her followers (and Santorum's) move to Perry.  The Paultards will likely warm more to Perry's "Ponzi scheme" than to Romney's "Obamneycare".

Of course, circling back to my opening, it's way too early to determine who will actually win Iowa and South Carolina.

But that never stopped anybody from guessing.

Desperate For A Nice Story?

Me, too.

I don't know why, but I found this to be a great story.  It's about MLS fans (apparently they do exist) and how they are transforming the sport.  What's great is that they are doing it in tandem with the poobahs who run things.

John Boehner Sucks At Being John Boehner

So, the Speaker of the House - essentially the most powerful and important member of either house of Congress - failed to pass a CR that would keep the government functioning.  Basically, he tried to accommodate his right wing, but alienated all but seven or so Democrats (I'm guessing Schuler, Cooper, Marshall...).  The Teatards would not vote for any spending ever under any circumstances.  The Democrats would not vote for a bill that paid for disaster relief by gutting a jobs program.

If this was a Parliamentary system - or even a semi-Presidential system - Boehner's ineptitude would have triggered no confidence and prompted a call for elections.  When I thought of that, it occurred to me that maybe THAT is the Constitutional change needed to address the dysfunction of the legislative branch.

Votes of no confidence.

Not for the President (who would give the Congress that much power?), but for the Congress as a whole.  This might work to thwart the nihilistic actions of the Tea Party.  Because even if Democrats win the House back (I'm guessing 50/50 chance of that right now), there will come a day when we will again have to deal with this tricorner hat wearing Teatards.

Presumably this would work better in the House than the Senate, since the staggering of Senate seats is presumed to be a "big deal" not to be altered for light or transient causes.

But at the moment, we need to hold the House more accountable, and this would help.

It would also mean a four week campaign season, fewer ads and less fundraising.  So it's a win all around.

Sad. Very Sad.

The Supreme Court has denied the stay.

Troy Davis will be executed.

Let his death by a call to action to make the greased skids - which characterize the death penalty in this country - a little more sticky.

I am ashamed of my native state and I am ashamed of my country.

We are killing a man for procedural reasons, not justice.

Well, I Like These Things!

I posted a few days ago that Democrats do well when they run ON class warfare as opposed to AWAY from class warfare.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/09/21/more-warren-porn/

The video at the link is Elizabeth Warren on Morning Joe.  I'm getting a teensy crush on the Professor.

But even better news potentially is that Troy Davis has had a stay by the Supreme Court.

Here's an interesting question: What will fervent Catholics Scalia, Alito and Roberts do?  After all Pope Panzerfaust Benedict has called for clemency.  Of course, Kennedy, the likely deciding vote will be the most important Catholic of all, but if he can get one of the others to back him, Davis might be spared.

Thomas is a Catholic, too, but we all know what that blood thirsty bastard is going to do.

Is It Worth It?

Meet Troy Davis.

I have not been keeping up too closely with the Troy Davis situation, but I have recently tried to inform myself.

From what I've read, this is just awful.

Off duty police officer Mark McPhail was killed by someone in a Burger King parking lot, probably either Davis or Redd Coles.  A bunch of witnesses said it was Troy Davis.  No physical evidence connected him to the crime.

Over the years, the majority of those who identified Davis as the shooter - or said that Davis confessed to him - have recanted their testimony.  When finally granted a hearing, Davis's lawyers failed to get Coles to appear before the court.  They were unable to subpoena him.  Because of that, testimony that other have made - that Coles confessed to shooting McPhail - was disallowed.  The judge ruled that while most of the recantations were dubious, a few seemed possible.

But what the hell, let's kill Davis anyway.

In all likelihood, Troy Davis is going to be killed tonight by the state of Georgia.  He will be taken into a room, a needle inserted into his arm and his heart stopped.

Can anyone plausibly argue that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?  I can't.  He might be guilty, but there are all sorts of doubts, doubts that even judges who have ruled against him have acknowledged.

How can this happen?

In part, because the legal system has evolved to a point where logic and justice are only vaguely aspirational goals - especially when it comes to people accused of killing police officers.  Logic and reason argue overwhelmingly that Davis is not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  But because of when those doubts entered into the legal machinery, those doubts are not given much weight.

This reflexive deference to the original trial makes sense if you are trying to foreclose endless rearguing of the same case.  It does not make sense if you want to avoid executing an innocent man.

And this lies at the heart of the problem with the death penalty.  Unless something extraordinary happens, Troy Davis will be dead tomorrow.  That's it.  No more appeals, no more quests to find justice.

Mark McPhail and Troy Davis will both be dead, and likely both killed illegitimately.

Here in Connecticut, we had the awful home invasion case where a mother and two girls were raped, mutilated and killed, their house burned down around them.  The evidence against the two is overwhelming and beyond a shadow of a doubt.  I can see where the state might decide that one or both of them should die.  Their crime is so lurid it sounds like a bad cop procedural show.

But we need to find a way to prevent potentially innocent people from getting executed.

Because when the state kills an innocent person, it's murder, same as what happened to Mark McPhail.

And when the state does it, it implicates us all.

Palin? Really, Ralph?

So Ralph Nader says some nice things about Palin, which is really just a massive act of projection on Ralph's part.

I only bring this up, because whenever Nader comes up, tbogg links to one of the greatest posts in the history of the internet, or at least in HIS history on the internet.

For your convenience I present it in full:

Your Mumia sweatshirt won’t get you into heaven anymore
By: TBogg Monday February 25, 2008 9:14 pm	Tweet171

After the group hug there was an inter-species orgy

A comment left over at digg regarding Ralph Nader:

The Democrats really hate Nader because he points out the fact that they are asking those of us on the left to vote for them but they aren’t doing anything for us. Did they end funding for the Republican’s crime spree in Iraq? No. Have they moved for UHC? No. Have they tried to stop corporate crimes? No. Have they tried to reform the tax code to be progressive? No. Have they tried to protect homeowners from predatory lenders? No. Have they defended our constitutional rights? No. Take back the FDA from the corporations? No. The FCC? No.
The Democrats don’t deserve my vote. They aren’t helping the left, why should the left help them?

Let me see if I can explain it this way:

Every year in Happy Gumdrop Fairy-Tale Land all of the sprites and elves and woodland creatures gather together to pick the Rainbow Sunshine Queen. Everyone is there: the Lollipop Guild, the Star-Twinkle Toddlers, the Sparkly Unicorns, the Cookie Baking Apple-cheeked Grandmothers, the Fluffy Bunny Bund, the Rumbly-Tumbly Pupperoos, the Snowflake Princesses, the Baby Duckies All-In-A-Row, the Laughing Babies, and the Dykes on Bikes. They have a big picnic with cupcakes and gumdrops and pudding pops, stopping only to cast their votes by throwing Magic Wishing Rocks into the Well of Laughter, Comity, and Good Intentions. Afterward they spend the rest of the night dancing and singing and waving glow sticks until dawn when they tumble sleepy-eyed into beds made of the purest and whitest goose down where they dream of angels and clouds of spun sugar.

You don’t live there.

Grow the fuck up.

Class Warfare

So, that's rich people on the left, and that's everyone else on the right.

So, Paul Ryan crept out from whatever hole he's crawled into to hide from his constituents to label Obama's plan class warfare.  There's a take on it here with a quote.

The more I think about it, the more the GOP's reflexive calls of "class warfare" are really a fine example of the B'rer Rabbit Gambit.

Every time a Democrat raises taxes on the rich, but not on everyone else, we get these yelps of CLASS WARFARE ZOMG!!!!!!1111!!  But what they are really doing is preempting the language.  They are really saying, "Don't throw me in that briar patch."

When Democrats run as class warriors, they do quite well.  When they are depicted as servants of special (read minority) interests, they do poorly.  The public polling couldn't be any clearer on this issue.  It's a huge winner, and tying a tax increase to a jobs program is perfect.  It takes two things that people want and makes them mutually reinforcing.

So the GOP needs to manufacture a freak-out over class warfare, so that "Democrats" like Mary Landrieu and Joe Lieberman and Heath Schuler will get all weak in the knees and drop quotes to the Times and the Journal.  But what Obama is proposing should be so non-controversial and so popular that opposing it on the grounds of "anything Obama's for, we're against" is a sure fire way to lose the debate.  The debate that will continue from now until either the Jobs bill passes or the election is held.

So they are going to try and whip up the Teatards and the Randians with tales of class warfare.  And they will pitch it in such a way as to invoke race, too, because that's where the votes are.

But I have to wonder if that well has run dry.  Right now, rich people are about as popular as Mike Vick at the American Kennel Club.

Go ahead, Paul.  Call Obama a class warrior.

And Mr. President, bring the fight to them.

UPDATE: Interesting.  Frosh GOP from NY state says he agrees with Obama's plan.

Chinks in the GOP facade?

My New Time Waster

I splurged for the "Sports Package" on my cable provider because I want to watch soccer with Thing One and Thing Two.  They show some rugby, too, so...win.

Anyway, I have spent more time watching it than they have.  Thing Two - who is a student of sport - wants to watch it.  Thing One - who is a talented soccer player - can't be bothered.

So, basically, my plan to share English Premier League games with my sons has met the cold hard reality that the Cartoon Network has already won their hearts and minds.

I Weep For My Country

When I see that GOP and Blue Dog politicians are embracing austerity when every single shred of evidence says that it will make the recession worse...

When I see that one of the leading candidates for the GOP nomination believes what some crack pot tells her about Gardisil over every major medical organization in the country...

When I see that the FBI has employed a racist who believes that every Muslim is - by definition - a radical intent on destroying the western way of life...

When I see prominent politicians dismiss global warming and freaking evolution as "theories" without understanding what a scientific theory is...

When I hear the GOP run against Social Security because they say it "won't be there for future generations" when that is simply a bald faced lie...

That's when I realize that we have abandoned an empirical view of the world.  We have abandoned the Enlightenment's commitment to reason and thought and replaced it with emotionalism and dogma.

This is the heart of everything that troubles us today.

I am hardly sold on every decision Obama has made or will make.  But he examines the evidence and makes decisions based on that and what the available options are.  I no longer believe that's true for most Republicans.  That is the single most terrifying part of our political process today.  And that is what I mean when I say the one of the major political parties has gone insane.

Max Weber called the Enlightenment the "disenchantment of the world."  We are being dragged back into the land of fairy tales and magical thinking.

And it will destroy us if we don't stop it.

Israel, O Isreal

Our policies toward Israel are pretty messed up.  Unlike the reciprocal relations we have with pretty much every other country, Israel pretty much calls the tune.  We have tremendous potential leverage with Israel, but no practical leverage because of the nature of our politics.

The Palestinians have said they are going to apply to become a member of the UN.  Israel, of course, is against this.  This means that we are, of course, against this.  Just about any OTHER ethnic/national minority in the world, and we would be sympathetic.  Southern Sudan?  East Timor?  Kosovo? Sign us up!  Palestine?  Not so much.

Israel has gone from being plucky underdog to regional bully.  And they are a bully who survives not only because of their own strength - which is considerable - but because of their somewhat one sided relationship with the US.  One of the reasons the Neo-Cons wanted to invade Iraq was because of Saddam's sponsorship of Palestinian terrorists.  You can argue the only people who benefitted from our invasion were the Iranians and the Likud Party.

Israel will never have peace without a Palestinian state.  It simply won't happen.  And that won't happen, because we won't force Israel to make necessary concessions.

And so, the US will use its veto power - not to extract concessions from Netanyahu's intransigent government - but to prevent Palestine from getting a seat in an International Debate Society.

Given the changes in Egypt, this is not going to make things easy for us or for Israel with the one nation that could conceivably harm Israel.  There will be no restraint from the new Egyptian leadership.  The leader of Al Qaeda is, of course, Egyptian.

This is not a smart move for the US.  But we will make it anyway.

And because the GOP won a relatively safe Democratic seat on Long Island, at least in part because of Israel-related issues, any spine that Obama showed at times towards Netanyahu will quickly melt away.

Lather, Rinse the blood out, Repeat

It's Full Of Stupid

I was reading a post at Bonddad's blog about how the Euro was weak (surprise) and therefore prime to be shorted.  This will - in turn - weaken the Euro more, which will make those shorting the Euro a ton of money.

It will also destabilize the Euro-Zone at an inopportune time and lead to very real suffering among people who are already struggling.

Economics and fiscal markets are not governed by Rational Actors.  They are governed by sociopaths.

Two Headlines From Yahoo

Rogue Trader Causes $2 Billion Loss

Nicholas Cage Awoken By Naked Man With Fudgesicle

Let's face it, only one of those headlines offers anything remotely akin to a surprise.

Three Strikes And You're Out

OK, bad news comes in threes, right?

So after the first two miserable pieces, we have the piece de resistance!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/15/us/politics/democrats-in-congress-balking-at-obamas-jobs-bill.html?hp

Blue Dogs and weak kneed Democrats are split on the Jobs bill.  They want to see "deficit reduction" before any money is spent on jobs.

Right, because the American people want that, too?  Actually, no, by a sizable majority, Americans want Congress to act on jobs.

The worst part is that these idiots are shitting their own bed.  The Obama jobs bill is almost certain NOT to pass.  By trampling on the message of that, they are empowering the GOP obstructionists to get away with it.

This jobs bill is a clear political winner - it wins on politics and on policy.  But the Heath Schulers and Mary Landrieus and Kay Hagans are just timid little kittens.

Because I'm sure if they express reservations on this bill, the GOP will go easy on them when they are up for re-election.

Morons.

I'm used to Democrats screwing up the politics.  But to screw up the politics AND the policy is impressive even for them.  One party can't do politics, one party can't do governance.

I have tried to be even keeled, but today has me thinking that maybe America really is doomed.

I Read The News Today, Oh Boy...

So the last "Holy Crap!" moment in the news is this: The Pennsylvania GOP wants to re-apportion electoral votes by Congressional District.  First, they gerrymander the hell out of the districts, so that all those brown Democratic voters are squeezed into a few super-blue districts in Philly and Pittsburgh.  The gist would be that Obama could win the popular vote in Pennsylvania but win a minority of electoral votes from PA overall.

With the GOP controlling both houses of the legislature and the governor's mansion, there is nothing illegal about this.  And nothing ironclad to stop them.

Maybe Democrats in Pennsylvania should have freaking voted in 2010.

A year ago, a colleague of mine said that whomever was elected in 2012 would preside over the dismantling of the American political system.  He's a Cassandra, so I thought "whatever, the world is always ending."

But let's game this out.

Congressional Republicans kill Obama's jobs bill.  The Greeks leave the Euro and European banks crash (again).  Things suck all over.

The GOP wises up and nominates Romney.  Romney and Obama have a tight race, but Obama pulls out a narrow win in the popular vote BOTH nationally and in PA.  But he loses 267-273 in the Electoral College because PA changed the rules.  Let's say Michigan and Ohio follow suit.  Suddenly he narrowly wins the popular vote in PA, MI, OH and USA.  But he loses a lopsided 250-290 in the Electoral College.

In 2000, we were at peace and prosperous, which helped explain the equanimity that met the decision in Bush v Gore.  How bad could it be, we all said.

If these states do this, and Obama wins the popular vote in such a way that he would have won prior to the rule changes... There will be blood in the streets.

I don't like hyperbole, but I think this is a legitimate threat.  When the GOP engages in behavior that his LITERALLY NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF THE REPUBLIC, most white people see it as a new age of divisive politics.  Black people see it very differently.  To them, it's no surprise that a black President is being treated this way.  If Romney wins via Electoral College shenanigans, black America will erupt in violence.

And the thing is, they won't be wrong to do so.

Jefferson said that while Rules are important, the Norms of institutions are even more important.

There is shit you should not do.

But the GOP is doing it.  And I think it will tear this country apart.

Dennis G over at Balloon Juice calls the GOP the Neo-Confederate Party.  Who knew they might literally precipitate a new Civil War?

Depressed? This Won't Help.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/super-committee-riven-by-major-divide-over-basic-fact.php?ref=fpa

So, Doug Elmendorf goes before the Super Congress and explains some basic facts about expansionary and contractionary economic policy.

The Republicans don't agree.

With the facts.

My favorite moment was when Kyl said he was worried that defense contractors might layoff workers if we cut defense spending.  But he was unimpressed with the idea that cutting state or infrastructure spending would have the same effect.

Why?

Ask him.  I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that military contractors spend hundreds of millions of dollars in lobbying fees and laid off construction workers spend considerably less.

Someone, maybe Mary Chestnut, said that the Confederacy's inability to coordinate national policy led to its defeat.  "The Confederacy was killed by a theory."

Fitting that the neo-confederate party of 2011 is trying to do that to the national economy.

I'm Going To Say, "No"

http://www.businessinsider.com/citis-buiter-greek-exit-from-the-eurozone-will-be-disaster-for-entire-world-2011-9

It seems that conventional wisdom is that if Greece leaves the Euro we are all doomed to be living in caves, eating our own filth.  Or something.

The idea is that those same "confidence fairies" that magically hover about and sprinkle magic confidence dust (it's hard work, which is why it's called a "confidence job") onto the markets will shriek and head for safe havens in, I dunno, China.  Massive bank runs in Spain seem to be the fear.

The idea is that if the Greeks leave the Euro it will undermine faith in the sustainability of the Euro in the other PIIGS.

First of all, I think the confidence fairy is about as real as the tooth fairy.  I think Greece leaving the Euro will be a bad thing for Greece in the short term, but good in the medium term and perhaps bad in the long term.

But I also know this.  Britain never joined the Euro.  Britain's failure to join the Euro did not undermine confidence in the Euro, why should piddly little Greece leaving the Euro be a cataclysm?

Also, if Greece leaving the Euro creates a mini-panic that unsettles German central bankers, maybe they will stop being such sanctimonious pricks and help out Spain.  Poor Spain had budget surpluses, before the markets attacked their debt.  Why did the markets attack their debt?

I don't know, markets aren't frakking rational!

If Greece leaves the Euro, the markets will freak out for 48-72 hours before everyone sort of realizes that nothing has really changed unless you're Greek.  Since most people are not Greek, things will settle down.

UPDATE: Apparently the worry is... Are you sitting down?... Do you have pearls close by for clutching?

Apparently the worry is that French and German banks held Greek debt and insured them with Collateralized Default Swaps.  Yes!  Market innovation to the rescue again!

Remember, as we move into our shiny new Hoovervilles, that markets - especially derivatives markets - should never be regulated.

I have a pitchfork in my garage.

I'm just saying.

Another Debate, But About What?

Been there, done that.

So, we had another vapid beauty pageant last night.

No, not the Miss Universe contest, the GOP debate.

First off, at some point you have to winnow the field.  A debate with Bachmann, Perry and Romney would be much more interesting than one that features any utterances from Rick Santorum.  You can throw Ron Paul in there for contrast, I guess.

The real debate ultimately is about Rick Perry.  And by debate, I don't mean what happened last night but what happened afterwards: the pundit dissection.

We should know by now that A) pundits usually read debates poorly and B) they can alter the narrative of the debate ex post facto.  Al Gore won all the snap polls in 2000, but soon we were inundated by stories about him sighing and rolling his eyes.  We were told that McCain did a great job against Obama in their first debate, but Obama got the poll numbers from actual normal people.

So it is with last night debates.  Josh Marshall and others say that Perry got creamed by Bachmann and Romney.  Again, I don't think policy positions matter to GOP primary voters as much as Marshall thinks they do.  Calling Social Security a ponzi scheme WORKS for Perry.

I think Perry has to worry more about Bachmann's attack on him about Gardisil.  The fact that Perry - whatever his motives - wanted to protect young women from cervical cancer could be really damaging in today's GOP.  It suggests he believes in science or that people are having sex before marriage.  The horror.

The Perry-Bachmann dynamic is the one to watch, because that's where the votes are.  Some have said that Perry's debate performance is just glib generalities and homilies.  I'm sorry, but when have they been anything BUT that?

Right now, we're stuck in this horrific limbo between the start of the campaign and actual voting, filled with the worst sort of punditry and predicting.  Iowa will actually tell us a lot, because if Perry beats Bachmann in Iowa, then he's the nominee.

But we do have to worry about scandals and unforced errors that could undermine the Perry juggernaut.

Because Marshall and others are correct that what Perry is saying now would render him unelectable in 2012.

UPDATE: As per usual, Booman says it better:

As I said last night, I don't feel qualified to judge who won the CNN/Tea Party debate. I am not crazy. Dana Milbank, however, is convinced that Rick Perry was the loser. Maybe. But I thought he did just fine. I thought he made Romney look like a wimp. And the rest of the field appeared to be little different from a swarm of gnats. Even Bachmann's attacks were less than devastating. Her premise was that Governor Perry forced girls to be immunized against HPV. But, as Perry made clear, there was a parental waiver so no one was forced to take the vaccine. She was outraged about something that isn't even true. Yet, that's kind of why I can't judge these debates. The whole show is 95% outrage about stuff that isn't true. If the audience is buying into what they're saying about Social Security or taxes or balancing the budget or climate change or why health care is expensive, then it's really not a competition to show you understand the issues and have credible plans to address them. It's more about conveying some kind of emotional message and connecting with the voters on a visceral level.

That's why it matters that Romney, like Pawlenty, exudes wimpishness. It matters that Huntsman lacks stature. And it matters that Perry projects confidence and raw strength. What they're saying is probably irrelevant.

(snip)

Because it wasn't even the craziest thing that he said last night and no one seems to be listening to the details anyway. Paul also said that we should leave the uninsured to die. Newt Gingrich said we can balance the budget without touching entitlements by just "modernizing" the government. Bachmann thought it was an outrage to prevent cervical cancer and didn't seem to realize that the Bill of Rights is part of the Constitution. Santorum tried to appeal to Latino voters by calling them the 'Illegal Vote." Romney tried to appeal to the Latino vote by saying they all came here looking for a hand-out. Herman Cain said he would create a commission of people who had been abused by the Environmental Protection Agency in order to assure the destruction of the Environmental Protection Agency. And I'm just scratching the surface here.

This isn't about reason or logic. That might play in a Democratic debate or in a general election debate, but it's meaningless in a debate among Republicans. In my book, Perry was the winner because he didn't cry. Romney is too wimpy, geeky, and bland. All the other candidates are midgets.

But, as I've said, I'm not a good judge.

I Don't Like Mondays, Tell Me Why?

Monday posts will be tougher this year.  Crazy schedule.  I might have to write one on Sunday and save it.

I guess I'll just say that I am shocked - SHOCKED! - to find out that Cantor doesn't approve of the government doing any direct hiring of people to do jobs.

The term "Stimulus" has become a cudgel.  It worked.  You can measure how it worked.  But it didn't keep us out of a recession and a deep jobs recession.  It prevented a depression, though.  That's something.  But the term itself became so freighted with bad meanings after a two year sustained (and unrejoined) attack, that calling something "stimulus" is to call it a failure.

But as the stimulus funds dry up, unemployment is growing again.  That should be clear to any casual observer.

Unemployment is especially bad among laid off state employees.  You could simply loan moneys to the states at zero interest to hire back their employees.  Red states might not take it, blue states likely will.  And then you can solidify your standing among states that see their unemployment numbers dip and demonstrate the failure of tea party ideology.

That might sway some of those otherwise dumb-ass independent voters.

The Names

The Names

by Billy Collins

Yesterday, I lay awake in the palm of the night. 
A soft rain stole in, unhelped by any breeze, 
And when I saw the silver glaze on the windows, 
I started with A, with Ackerman, as it happened, 
Then Baxter and Calabro, 
Davis and Eberling, names falling into place 
As droplets fell through the dark. 
Names printed on the ceiling of the night. 
Names slipping around a watery bend. 
Twenty-six willows on the banks of a stream. 
In the morning, I walked out barefoot 
Among thousands of flowers 
Heavy with dew like the eyes of tears, 
And each had a name -- 
Fiori inscribed on a yellow petal 
Then Gonzalez and Han, Ishikawa and Jenkins. 
Names written in the air 
And stitched into the cloth of the day. 
A name under a photograph taped to a mailbox. 
Monogram on a torn shirt, 
I see you spelled out on storefront windows 
And on the bright unfurled awnings of this city. 
I say the syllables as I turn a corner -- 
Kelly and Lee, 
Medina, Nardella, and O'Connor. 
When I peer into the woods, 
I see a thick tangle where letters are hidden 
As in a puzzle concocted for children. 
Parker and Quigley in the twigs of an ash, 
Rizzo, Schubert, Torres, and Upton, 
Secrets in the boughs of an ancient maple. 
Names written in the pale sky. 
Names rising in the updraft amid buildings. 
Names silent in stone 
Or cried out behind a door. 
Names blown over the earth and out to sea. 
In the evening -- weakening light, the last swallows. 
A boy on a lake lifts his oars. 
A woman by a window puts a match to a candle, 
And the names are outlined on the rose clouds -- 
Vanacore and Wallace, 
(let X stand, if it can, for the ones unfound) 
Then Young and Ziminsky, the final jolt of Z. 
Names etched on the head of a pin. 
One name spanning a bridge, another undergoing a tunnel. 
A blue name needled into the skin. 
Names of citizens, workers, mothers and fathers, 
The bright-eyed daughter, the quick son. 
Alphabet of names in a green field. 
Names in the small tracks of birds. 
Names lifted from a hat 
Or balanced on the tip of the tongue. 
Names wheeled into the dim warehouse of memory. 
So many names, there is barely room on the walls of the heart.

It Still Hurts

I'm watching the reading of names at Ground Zero.

And I start crying.

Ten years.

Thing Two walked in and asked what was going on.  He's very bright, very empathetic.  But luckily he can't feel this.

Our students don't feel it as much either.  It was a scary moment, I guess for the 4 to 8 year olds.  But that immediate, confusing, angry, visceral pain doesn't belong to them.

I hope nothing like it ever will.

Unvirtuous Cycle

Booman has a nice little piece about how the GOP has basically created a self-reinforcing cycle of bad behaviors that will be very difficult to break.  Sentient politicians understand that killing Obama's job bill dead will not play well back in the districts.  This is precisely why Obama is out in those districts stumping for the bill.

But since they have literally become reflexive in their opposition to anything Obama wants to do (that idea that all of modern conservatism is based on being transgressive), they will find it hard to pivot to being responsible legislators.

There are probably enough votes in the House to pass something close to the President's bill, if it was simply taken on the merits.  But I doubt there are enough GOP members willing to buck not only the Teatard base, but also their own previous statements.  And I certainly don't think Boehner has the acumen to shepherd this thing through to completion.

New York Magazine

First they get Frank Rich, now Jonathan Chait.

I guess they got tired of people buy their magazine because they thought it was The New Yorker.

At any rate, we can now stick a fork in The New Republic.

I Didn't Mean Not To Post Today

But since no one apparently reads this anyway, I guess I'll take a pass.

OK, So I Am Watching The Speech

7:35
Nice to see a little fire from Obama defending common sense regulation.

7:36
Looks like the poetry is coming.  Lincoln is a sure bet.

7:37
Laying a real challenge over infrastructure spending and federal role in American economy.  This is good.

7:38
Nice theme of community over individualism.  Meanwhile, the local news team's News Van keep zipping back and forth across the bottom of the screen.  Annoying.

7:39
"My plan is reasonable and bipartisan.  I am saying we can do this."  And let's see how THAT flies on the right side of the aisle.

7:40
Nice, Boehner.  Way to golf clap.  Maybe you should have stayed on the course.

7:41
Obama definitely laying the groundwork for a real campaign for this bill.  That is exactly right.  Make this the beginning of 2012, because the GOP only responds to political pressure.

7:42
Bob Schiefer: "He threw a high hard one at Congress."  Hell yeahs.

7:48
And the f-ing terrorists have to go and make noise and steal the show.

7:53
Douglas Holtz-Eakins is on PBS and is a dick.  If he's an Economist, then that really is the dismal science.

Can't Even Call The Horse Race

So we have the analysis in on the GOP debate. (Of course I didn't watch it.)

You have a bunch of Serious People say that Romney clearly won the debate, because Perry said some crazy stuff.  He said that Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme.  He glorified in executing a bunch of people.  He said some confusing crap about Galileo.

Jon Chait and others take a less analytical view.  I think they're right.  Yes, Perry said stuff that will cripple him in the general election if he's the nominee.  But none of this makes it less likely that he will actually be the nominee.

People think that Bachmann's campaign sank because she said some crazy crap.  That is simply untrue.  In fact, she rose to be Romney's main challenger because she said some crazy crap.

The GOP electorate is, in fact, crazy.  Witness the applause when Brian Williams pointed out that Texas executes a ton more people than anyone else.  Someone else wrote that the basic idea of conservatism today is transgression.  They embrace anything that pisses off "political correctness", and political correctness is anything that people believe that is "nice".  Social Security, not executing people, not racial profiling, hell, racism itself.

One of Reagan's advisors said that politics is TV with the sound off.

Perry lapped Bachmann, not because he's any saner than she is, but because he LOOKS like a President.  It wasn't Bachmann's crazy utterances that cost her, it was her crazy eyes.  Perry can speak the crazy in low, Texas-y tones.

They eat that up.

There are still three months before the Monkey Show really takes off in Iowa.  That's a lot of time to uncover the mounds of fetid crap in Perry's background.  But if Romney can't change the optics of Perry, I don't think he can catch him.

And if Perry gets the nomination, Obama wins.

Ponzi Scheme?

Really?